Symptom Perception in Pathological Illness Anxiety

Tactile Sensitivity and Bias

Bibliographic Data

ID19306334
AuthorsCarolin Wolters (0000-0002-6252-477X, University of Cologne, corresponding author), Timo Slotta (0000-0002-7217-0477, CBS University of Applied Sciences), Judith Ratayczak, Judith von Schönfeld (0000-0001-8177-0899, CBS University of Applied Sciences), Michael Witthöft (0000-0002-4928-4222, CBS University of Applied Sciences), Alexander L Gerlach (0000-0001-6794-5349, CBS University of Applied Sciences), A Pohl (0000-0002-3761-5768, CBS University of Applied Sciences, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume85
Issue1
Pages79-88
Publication date2023-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePsychosomatic Medicine (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-3174 • E-ISSN: 1534-7796
PublisherOvid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1097/psy.0000000000001154
PMID36516317
OpenAlexW4311445384
LanguageEN
References cited52

OBJECTIVE: Symptom perception in pathological illness anxiety (PIA) might be biased so that somatic signals are overreported. In the somatic signal detection task (SSDT), performance in detecting weak tactile stimuli gives information on overreporting or underreporting of stimuli. This task has not yet been applied in PIA. METHODS: Participants with PIA (n = 44) and healthy controls (n = 40) underwent two versions of the SSDT in randomized order. In the original version, tactile and auxiliary light-emitting diode (LED) stimuli were each presented in half of the trials. In the adapted version, illness or neutral words were presented alongside tactile stimuli. Participants also conducted a heartbeat mental tracking task. RESULTS: We found significantly higher sensitivity and a more liberal response bias in LED versus no-LED trials, but no significant differences between word types. An interaction effect showed a more pronounced increase of sensitivity from no LED to LED trials in participants with PIA when compared with the adapted SSDT and control group (F(1,76) = 5.34, p = .024, η2 = 0.066). Heartbeat perception scores did not differ between groups (BF01 of 3.63). CONCLUSIONS: The increase in sensitivity from no LED to LED trials in participants with PIA suggests stronger multisensory integration. Low sensitivity in the adapted SSDT indicates that attentional resources were exhausted by processing word stimuli. Word effects on response bias might have carried over to the original SSDT when the word version was presented first, compromising group effects regarding bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was preregistered on OSF (https://osf.io/sna5v/)

Anxiety · Attentional bias · Audiology · Perception · Psychiatry · Response bias · Tactile perception · Worry · Medicine · Music Therapy and Health · Neuroscience · Pain Management and Placebo Effect · Psychology · Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOI